A Colorado judge will allow prosecutors to interrogate theater gunman James Holmes using truth serum if he pleads not guilty by reason of insanity.

Holmes is the suspected gunman involved in the movie theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado last July. Holmes has been charged with multiple counts of murder for the open shooting, which killed 12 people and injured another 58.

Colorado Judge William Sylvester ruled that prosecutors have the choice to use truth serum on Holmes in a "narcoanalytic interview" to determine whether or not he was legally insane during the July 20 shooting last year. But this is only if Holmes pleads not guilty by reason of insanity.

A plea of not guilty had been entered for Holmes yesterday after his lawyer said that the defendant was not ready to enter his own plea. Holmes can later change it.

Legal experts have questioned Judge Sylvester's ruling, saying that taking away the fifth amendment rights of the defendant because of an authorization to use truth serum drugs will raise a lot of fifth amendment-related issues.

Also, a jury may object to the court forcing truth serum upon the defendant.

Medical experts have weighed in as well, saying that the defendant still has the ability to lie while using truth serum. They also said that truth serum would be effective at determining Holmes' current state of mind, but a short-acting barbiturate like truth serum would not indicate his state of mind during last year's shooting. It will only loosen him up to talk about it.

"First of all, people can still lie under the influence of amytal," said Dr. August Piper, a psychiatrist from Seattle. "More importantly, the person under the influence of the drug is susceptible to outside suggestion. To try and do this would be unlikely to yield useful information, and could pervert the course of justice by rendering the defendant susceptible to pressure."

The US founding fathers would blanch at reading what you just spewed. It's not only diametrically opposed to all the values and ideals of the US constitution and bill of rights, it's also nothing but utter fascist crap. It's apologist claptrap of how the state should be allowed to execute innocent people just for the sake of upholding the system itself. How does that align with any view of what constitutes liberty and justice?

There is seriously something deeply, profoundly wrong with you. Even if your self-preservation instinct has been neutered enough that you'd say, "Hey, no biggie, I might be innocent but most people who get put to death aren't, so it's for the good of my country", I would venture to say that you speak for a very, very small percentage of human beings.

"Hey, I'm in the prime of my life, but sure, inject me with this lethal cocktail of drugs that might or might not be a painless way to die."

There are known cases where a person who was almost certainly wrongly convicted have been put to death. But hey, it's for the greater good, right?

People die in unfortuante tragedies all the time but we don't stop using cars or airplanes or stop giving cops guns. If there is an occasional tragety taking place in the jail system that is to be expected and is probably orders of magnuitude less common than all the other types of tragedies in our lives.

Some people need death and if you are too stupid to be that innocent guy standing over the body, holding the murder weapon, spraying your DNA all over the place, and talking yourself into handcuffs then maybe you need death too.

"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates